|
aetherevarising, I am not ignoring you, but I must start in this area with a "One at a time" approach.
Grumpy. I must both agree and disagree, and as the "Broadness" of the term "Displacement Current" may be at fault, I wish to make a comment and get your opinion on my thoughts. Again, this is theory for me, even though I have some data to back it up.
I could agree with the "Non-ionic" propagation of "Energy", but I can't accept the word "Electrical" in there as most people would get confused and slide back to standard conduction currents. This is stated just to to clarify where I am coming from. At the deep level, this is an accurate statement, but I don't think I need to explain that situation any further to you. Probably it's the other way around.
Now, the second and third part of what you said. (Typed?) Unknowingly, you have stepped into an argument that we have had going for a little while now. (Not you and me, but others. They are NOT willing to converse on the net, nor may I even use names without getting yelled at. I'm actually letting a couple watch me type....) A Non-ionic charge is a good indicator of where my side comes in. There is NO charge, in the common sense of the term, as far as a comparison with the electrical charge of an electron or positron. (I"ll avoid the center, for this explanation of my point.) This is where so much confusion and difficulty comes in, as there IS a charge, but not a magnetic field generating type of charge. Actually, this part we all agree on, but WHAT that charge consists of, well, I doubt anyone would want to hear all the crazy, ignorant things being said right now. Short Version... I am on the side that there is a "Tie-In" to part of the RE effect and that it is closer to an "Electrical" type of field but propagated in the aether, and others want to convince me it is a "Tie-In" to aether basis of gravitational field, but being produced only during the "Change", it manifests itself this way. I disagree with the others, but cannot prove them wrong, yet. (We are working on this, much to my regret. Kills all my other "Fun" stuff for a while.)
My question is this, "Do you firmly believe that the dielectric is polarized with an actual standard charge, without any charge carriers?" This is what I would consider a profound statement, as it belies the electron as the source of the charge, completely. (I won't start on a description of lepton charge effects here.) The reason I am leaning to the different effects here is that many EE's have done "Extensive" bench tests and many pulse tests of inductors, and yet the charge rates and values are exactly described, relative to standard "electron" charge. If the displacement Current, meaning only the one around a wire, for now, were involved in the mag field creation, the effects of altering this would be MUCH easier to detect. I hope you see where I am going with this.
To give a simple "Hint" of where this can be researched easily, think of what you get with a simple Tesla Setup, through a spark gap and transformer. This type of "Energy" is NOT magnetically coupled in the standard sense, and the output IS different than standard conduction current. (If you were to, just for an hour, accept this as fact, then re-read certain Tesla patents, certain circuit behavior makes a lot more sense. I don't expect anyone to do that, however.) Most have seen the simple experiment where the fact is proven that "Current" flows in both directions. Sticking with standard theory, the electron charge is passing out of the negative, heading to the positive. The positive to negative charge is not actually defined properly in modern textbooks, although the fact of it's existence is now accepted. Could these two attributes be connected? (I can't even offer that part of the theory, yet.)
So, now that I have totally confused the issue, I'll re-ask, so as to try and get an answer. I will attempt to comprehend it, though I offer no guarantee. This is worded differently, so as to point the concept in the direction I am looking for, without depending too much on conventional definations, as they can be different, depending on how one learned them. The first leads to the second, and slides into areas you may not wish to bother with. Ignore it if so desired.
1) "Do you think the "Displacement Current" around a wire carries the SAME type of charge as what the "Electron" is theorized to?"
2) If "Yes" - Do you think, therefore, the the "electron" charge is not intrinsic to the particle itself, but is an attribute of the particle structure, or do you have a different explanation? (Insight appreciated, details not yet required.)
2) IF "No" - Do you think that this "Different" "Charge" is capable of producing the same type of magnetic field as a moving charge carrier, like the electron, or would this be a slightly different field? (Any ideas more than welcome!)
Extra Credit for me) Are you of the opinion the the "Proton" is the only source of a "Postive" charge, (Ignore positron, please.) or do you subscribe to the inverted phase of the standing 3d Wave theory. (You can laugh at me now and ignore this...)
I would really appreciate any insight you could give me, as talking with the same, opinionated, people that I am forced to deal with never allows for fully backing off and insuring that self-deception isn't going off the deep end. I was forced to "ignore" the Phase comment, as that can only be applied if certain attributes of this effect are taken for granted. I'm not quite there yet.
Thanks.
P.S. ION, That was an excellent explanation of things that a lot of OU researchers have gotten caught by. I include myself in that as I still must be extremely careful in that area. Working with low dV/dt and low Freq can help, but I still get caught, sometimes. I am very glad to see there is real experience keeping watch. I still have the same opinion that I've had for half a century. I HATE RF. (In a good way, as I use and basically understand it, but it makes things difficult. I leave that to others to play with. I won't get into the real reasons I have "Trouble" with some accepted RF theory.)
|
Author
Topic: Displacement Current - Does it Exist? (Read 126336 times)
